False. Ideas are not automatically illusions. That is a strange claim.
Again, false. Ideas may have a correlation to reality, but not all ideas MUST actually exist as “objective reality” to be accurate and valuable.
False. We ask to be liberated from our own evil impulses and behaviors. Obviously.
Many many parts. That is for another thread.
That is for another thread, too. Camus in particular had a very different sense of this.
Are you my father?
Are you a typical Baptist? I really like your replies. Like nearly every time!There’s no framing, I only pointed out that religions differ in their morality and disagree about who got it right. You sincerely believe in conscience that your religion is right but others sincerely believe in conscience their religion is right, and there’s no unbiased rational means to choose between.
You lost me- I was talking about religions not moral aberrations.
But I covered that. The person has formed and informed her conscience, she may have wrestled long and hard, discussed it with her priest, and then if she still can’t agree CCC 1790 says A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself.
You’re right, it’s your Church and if Catholics want to call fellow Catholics secularized and irreligious it’s not for others to judge.
Summations of the harmfulness or beneficence seen in human behaviors.
No. See above.
True.
No. You are misquoting me. I reject that “love” exists as an external objective force in this universe. Love shared between individuals is VERY powerful.
No. The word “ultimate” is misleading for these men’s comments on this topic. They rejected external value (from the supernatural) and intrinsic value (as if emanating from privileged status of a species or group). But they fully appreciated the value that the individual creates in one’s existence through taking responsibility for one’s actions and self-creative potential. “Ultimately” one constructs one’s “meaning” from the life we take responsibility for; if life “ultimately” is meaningless, then one simply has not succeeded in the challenge of living in a godless universe.
I am born and living in the country where Muslim is majority (see my “location” above), ruled by Muslim government, and even Buddhist are more than Christians. Even even among Christians, only approximately 1 of out 10 Christians is a Catholic according to statistic.
I see. Sorry.
Nice thing to say, and mutual dude. I’d hope there’s no such thing as a typical Baptist but having moved to Spain the sample size is too small to estimate.Are you a typical Baptist? I really like your replies. Like nearly every time!
.Jews may disagree.
Still baffled by your continuing use of a motto from the godless Revolution once used in France to mark churches not controlled by the RCC. Are there sources from the first century which interpret the teaching as being about modern concepts of individual liberty and equality, or are these a later synthesis?
Jesus taught things that were not recognized by His audience? Not recognized or not conveniently
reinterpreted for modern eyes?I applaud your motives, but friendship isn’t based on reasoned philosophy, let alone laying down His life. 1 Cor 1:18-31 talks of philosophy in this context, and Paul calls it a foolishness that God will destroy.
That’s why I get such a charge out of Mark 4:33,34. Who let that slip by???Jesus taught things that were not recognized by His audience? Not recognized or not conveniently
We have SO much to “thank” Paul for! Well, at least that and what faithers did with his words.
Many people may disagree but that proves precisely nothing! Jesus Himself said He had come to fulfil the Law and often used the words “But I say to you…”
- Why on earth does that matter?
- Was the truth of the principles the monopoly of the Revolutionaries?
- Did they invent the principles?
- If not where did they obtain them?
- Aren’t the principles of liberty, equality and fraternity implicit in the message of Jesus that we are all children of the same Father?
The sources are His own words and actions which led His followers to behave likewise.
- What more do you want than that?
- Are you saying that Jesus did not teach liberty, equality and fraternity?
- How do the “modern concepts” differ From His?
- Are you suggesting His concepts are outmoded?
- What exactly do you believe?
No. His audience were well aware of the fact that He treated men, women and children equally and regarded them as members of the same family. That was one of the reasons that led to His Crucifixion. The High Priests could not tolerate an upstart who contradicted them. I specified the **formulation **of human rights. Jesus was not a political philosopher but a man of action who put principles into practice and explained them with **parables **not abstractions.
I did** not **state that friendship is based on reasoned philosophy.
Didn’t Jesus appeal to reason as well as conscience? Paul was not referring to **all **philosophy as foolishness.
- What do you think saints like Thomas Aquinas were writing?
- Do you think God will destroy all the works of Christian apologetics produced in the last two thousand years?
- Why are you participating on this forum if **all **philosophy is foolishness?
I would say that this depends on how revisionist you are willing to be. Jesus was not advocating democracy or individual freedom and liberties on this earth. He, of course, assumed that most individuals had a few freedoms. Didn’t take Jesus to tell us this. This idea preceded Jesus.
I did not miss your point at all. I simply reject 95% of it.
But you’re still talking as a Christian, not as a Jew.
They’re just three words amongst others. There was also Union, Strength, Virtue; Strength, Equality, Justice; Liberty, Security, Property; Liberty, Reason, Equality; etc. You’re picking on one slogan amongst many. Even then you’re ignoring the Liberty, Equality, Fraternity or Death version. It’s an advertising slogan, you could pick others and give them a Christian spin: Reach out and touch someone [AT&T], Be all you can be [US Army] or even Because I’m worth it [L’Oreal].
You’re giving His words a modern interpretation. For your thesis to work, you would need to prove that the slogan couldn’t be created without His teaching, and that His original audience had a similar conception of self and society as we have post-Enlightenment. If Christ’s teaching is the basis of modern civilization, you must also show why it’s a secular and materialistic civilization.
*11. What do you think saints like Thomas Aquinas were writing?
12. Do you think God will destroy all the works of Christian apologetics produced in the last two thousand years?
13. Why are you participating on this forum if **all ***philosophy is foolishness?
I’m sure the atheists, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. who wrote the Universal Declaration of Human Rights had reasons. For example, a Jew might say we’re all children of Adam and Eve, a humanist might say it’s the only way towards a fair, peaceable and happy society, and a historian might say it’s the only kind of society that works long-term.